I agree with ND at number 1, and Texas is likely ahead of us as well, so much of Texas are UT fans, and that's a big state. But I truly do not think any of the others on that list have a bigger fan base than us. USC not only has a pretty weak fanbase, but not even than many SoCal people are that into USC because so many here are from everywhere else.

Ohio State has almost everyone in Ohio, but almost no one outside of it.

I agree. SoCal teams will have a hard time gaining die hard fans. The atmosphere is different out here. In Michigan sports and sports allegiances are everything. Out here there seems to be an aura of indifference.

I also think if you are talking about true fan bases Michigan will be top two or three. The other programs I feel benefit from those jumping on the bandwagon when things are going well IMO.

This is still the case. I've been to a number of SC games against Pac Ten teams in the last couple years, and none of them (with the exeption of UCLA) none of them were sold out, most weren't all that close. I always give my SC friends shit for it.

Michigan's spot at number 9 is a little low, but it is hard to disagree with any of the teams on this list. I would like to know his methodology for making this list, since it would be interesting to see what leads to this ranking.

I do think that if it came down to actually following the team and not just having a license plate cover and baseball hat you could definitely move USC down the list.

Despite their recent success and the undeniable history, I've never been that overwhelmed by the fanbase of Oklahoma. They had AP and were in the NC game, but I've never heard anything about their crazy fans, aside from the Red River Rivalry. a caveat is that I've only lived in Chicago and UM (although I just moved to NY) so I haven't really had the chance to see it first hand.

I also think the last couple seasons have dropped our ranking. I'm not sure, but I seem to recall some of these same lists from 11/06 giving M a lot more credit.

Otherwise, like I said before it's so subjective that I think an unranked top ten would be easier to put together than a ranked one.

Feldman didnt give a definition and was answering a question from a reader. I would have provided a link but it is premium content at ESPN and not everyone will be able to read it unless they are "insiders."

i've heard that many times as well. michigan has more living alumni than any other school. what's funny is that there is probably data on something like this. one could take a more educated guess from alumni numbers, apparel sales, tv numbers, etc. he basically said "there's an answer out there, but instead of finding it, i'm going to take a complete shot in the dark and pretend i'm correct."

According to the latest annual report from the Collegiate Licensing Company:
Top Selling Universities are:
(1.) The University of Texas at Austin
(2.) The University of Michigan
(3.) The University of Florida
(4.) Louisiana State University
(5.) University of Notre Dame
(6.) University of North Carolina
(7.) University of Georgia
(8.) The University of Alabama
(9.) The Pennsylvania State University
(10.) University of Tennessee at Knoxville
Link: http://www.clc.com/clcweb/publishing.nsf/Content/Fiscal+Year-End+Ranking...

But I'm not sure how credible this is, since i don't see OSU anywhere in the top 75.

2. Ohio State -I say has a place on this list, they are the ONLY respectable team in Ohio and they have a ton of followers (maybe #3 or #4)

3. Texas - TX is probably #2 on this list, everything is about the burnt orange in TX and the state is massive.

4. Penn State - seems kind of bland and flavorless at times, but they do hail from a big state and have been relevant for decades, probably about right.

5. USC - seems unlikely they should be so high, I dont know anyone without a Strong connection (alumni or literally from LA all their lives, knows Nick Lachey personally...) that likes them. Maybe we can switch with them.

6. Oklahoma - good program and definately on this list, not sure of their actual spot, probably down a few.

7. Alabama - I mean nothing else in this state to care about, Forrest Gump plug? I think they took a big hit though in the last 20 years.

8. Nebraska - Fan base is loyal to a fault and they had a heck of a run, probably belong in the 10th spot though with the failures of the last 7 years.

9. Michigan - Clearly should be more like 5th.

10. LSU - dont know if they belong on this list. I dont know anyone outisde of their geographic region that likes them. Their tradition isnt anything impressive, their gear doesnt sell from what I see.

Honorable Mention:

Sucks for the State of FL that they have three teams... But I think the Gators have a shot at #10 on this list either way especially with their recent success. Miami probably is also on the outside of this list, and all three FL schools are probably top 20.

It's hard to argue that anyone loves their team more than fans in Tuscaloosa. I have a cousin who recently moved to Alabama, and she was making small talk with co-workers in her office last fall. When they asked her what time she would be going down to the game, she responded, "What game?"

They couldn't comprehend someone NOT going to the football game there, and in SEC country, in general. It's like religion to them. You add in the history, they're pretty hard to beat.

OK, you may be correct about Alabama fans loving their team more than any other fanbase, but this isn't a list of the most diehard fans, it's simply the LARGEST fanbase. Every single person in Alabama could be a Crimson Tide fan (which isn't the case, because Auburn still has a big fanbase) and it would still only be a few million people.

Large fanbases are created by 2 main criteria:

1. Being the go-to team in a populous state/metro area. Examples are USC and Texas, OSU to a lesser extent.

2. Bringing in students nationwide, sending alumni nationwide. Examples are ND and Michigan. Yes, other schools do this to an extent as well, no schools threatening this list do it nearly as well as ND and Michigan. From personal experience, LA is filled with UM fans because either a family had a son or daughter go there, or they are alumni who moved out here.

It's for these reasons that I don't like teams like Alabama and Nebraska on the list, because they don't meet either criteria. Alabama has a very strong following in Alabama, there just aren't many people there.

This is not definitive, but a better indicator than somebody's gut feeling is sales of apparel and merchandise. I think it stands to reason that more fans would equal more sales, though some things obviously could skew the results a bit (e.g. if some fan bases are more die-hard, or have more money to spend).

Here are the rankings by sales from 2005:

(1.) The University of Texas at Austin(2.) The University of Michigan
(3.) University of Notre Dame
(4.) University of Georgia
(5.) University of North Carolina
(6.) The University of Florida
(7.) University of Oklahoma
(8.) University of Tennessee at Knoxville
(9.) The University of Alabama
(10.) The Pennsylvania State University
(11.) Florida State University
(12.) Louisiana State University
(13.) Auburn University
(14.) University of Kentucky
(15.) University of Wisconsin
(16.) University of Miami
(17.) University of Illinois
(18.) University of Nebraska
(19.) University of Arkansas Fayetteville
(20.) University of South Carolina

Yes. This list is very telling. I'm not surprised that USC is not on the list (and it's certainly not because their fanbase can't afford merch).

However, in Feldman's defense, I think the list was just for football fanbases, and merchandise would be for all sports. So teams like UNC are much higher than they should be based on their bball sales. M and ND are both higher than they should be for a similar reason, although football is the top sport at both schools, basketball and hockey are both sports that sell a lot of apparel at those schools as opposed to a lot of the list. UGA, however, who doesn't have hockey and has never had a good basketball team, is surprisingly high.

something to consider is that this is not a ratio or interval scale - the intervals between ranks are not equal. Thus, with your point about multiple sports at UM or ND, we really need to know the numbers associated with each school. If UM is really close to, say UGA, then we can assume that, in terms of merchandise, UM should be lower on a football-only list. But if UM's numbers are much higher, we might be able to (liberally) assume that they should still be high on the list in terms of just football.

Yes, I agree with that. I probably wasn't clear in my post, I didn't mean (necessarily) that ND and UM were higher on the ranking than they should be, but higher in total dollar amounts because of the other sports. But then Texas has a big basketball program too, so in actuality ND or UM could be above them as well.

That list is not exhaustive, though, because not all colleges license their merchandise through CLC. Note that OSU is nowhere to be found, even though it's certain that they sold a ton of stuff. Also, I'd be surprised if USC, as defending national champs that year, didn't actually crack the top 10.

I can wear a M hat or jacket in an airport or a pub out of town and they are good for at least 2 drinks. I was at the Sunset Grill in St. Augustine, FL (just like the Don Henley song) and had a M jacket on and a bridal party came in and the guys bought me drinks and invited me to the reception! The bride was not too happy. Of course I did not go but they coaxed me into having my first shot of Jager. That is nasty shit.

Nebraska and Alabama do have a fair appeal outside of just their own state I think, because of the whole Heartland/Bear Bryant/Good ole' Boy image. Those two schools do the best job cultivating that identity. This allows them to draw fans from neighboring states, especially Nebraska who doesn't have a lot of traditional football powerhouses nearby. So I would agree that they are definitely deserving of spots in the top 10.

USC on the other hand I think is massively overrated on this list, college football is not very big in LA.

I was surprised to not see Georgia? It always seemed to me like they have a ton of fans.

I have no data to back this up, but I'd be willing to bet my 401K on it (which has tanked anyway).

I have never met a Nebraska fan who 1) didn't grow up there 2) or didn't go to school there. Not saying there aren't any, but their numbers are tiny. You live in Iowa, you root for ISU or the Hawks. You live in Colorado, it's CSU or the Buffs. Missouri, Mizzou. Kansas: KSU or Raulk Chalk. Oklahoma: OSU or Boomer Sooner. You get the point. Don't get me wrong. Nebraska fans are great. Extremely knowledgeable, and from myexperiences in Lincoln, and watching them play Colorado in Boulder once, very respectful. However, they overwhelmingly drove cars with Nebraska plates on them.

Fans are passionate about their alma maters, and if not graduates of those schools, they are passionate about the teams from their states. Some other regional team that's steeped in tradition means very little to most people. By that logic, hordes of native folk in Indiana/Illinois/Minnesota or alums thereof would be Michigan or OSU football fans. The vast majority of them aren't.

Same with Bama. Spend some time in Mississippi, Tennessee, Arkansas, Louisiana, etc. You'll find out how many non-natives of Alabama and non-alumni are fans of the Tide.

Or maybe I'm wrong about all of this, and perhaps the reason Georgia not making the list was puzzling is the the state borders Alabama for about 300 miles. Thus Georgians are mostly Bama fans given that Vince Dooley, UGA Five, and Hershel Walker don't quite have the cache of the Bear, herringbone hats, and Broadway Joe.

most overweight, then Bama and LSU walk away with this title, hands down. Zing!

Television may be a good indicator of the size of a fan base, too. The contract Dame has with NBC speaks for itself. Granted, they're not bound by a conference negotiating with a network, but ND has been pretty average for a long time and I think NBC still pulls good numbers. Didn't they just re-up recently, too?

Another example: Michigan just came off a 9-loss season, but you'll find them all over t.v. this fall. Isn't the WMU game going to be on ESPN or ESPN2 even (i.e., not even Game Plan?). The audience is huge, and networks know it.

I can't prove it, but I suspect other than Texas (and I'm not sure about this one either) and Dame, there's no way anyone else on the list has a larger base than Michigan.

... I suppose. Good point. But having lived in Colorado, Chicago, St. Louis, and Alanta over the past 15 years, I have always found it pretty easy to find Michigan on television (versus the relative frequency of other teams appearances) even prior to the advent of things like GamePlan. Not that you could see every game, but my friends who were fans of other schools used to give me a hard time, complaining that Michigan got way too much air time.

Actually I think BTN makes it more accessible to most fans around the country. Gameplan is expensive and BTN is available in most Dish packages above the family plan. So I think we are agreeing that Michigan football is readily available and probably more so than many other quality teams.

I admit it--I have watched many a Notre Dame game over the years hoping to see them lose. I think there are a lot of us.

Not to say that fan base isn't also a huge factor, but that's part of it. I suppose I could put it a little differently, but I think Notre Dame's television contract is as much a factor of their name recognition as it is of the size of their fan base.

the size of a fan base, then it stands to reason that U-M should be at or at least near the top of this list. According to Wikipedia (so it must be true!), U-M is the most televised school in college football history (382 televised games).

I'm not entirely sure that the rubrics being tossed around here are necessarily good for determining the size of the Michigan fanbase.

Most living alumni? I knew plenty of people at UM who could have given two shits if we even had a football team. There are plenty of Michigan alums who simply don't like football, sports in general, etc. Hell, a lot of them probably cheer for schools besides M due to other ties. This is a flawed stat for measuring fanbase.

Merchandise sales? I own an LA Dodgers hat. I wear it a lot. I could name maybe three players on the Dodgers. We have a very cool logo and people will buy things emblazoned with it. It's simple.

The fact is, I don't think we're even in the stratosphere you guys are saying we're in. We don't carry the entire state of Michigan... hell, we barely carry Metro Detroit and that's a 45 minute drive away from campus. I think nine is the perfect place for us.

... but that leaves us exactly where Feldman did (presumably, at least ... not an Insider). If these are flawed, give us an unflawed stat for measuring a fan base, please.

Also, Michigan doesn't carry the entire state. Good point. But neither does Alabama or Oklahoma and those populations are much smaller than the state of Michigan's (and Oklahoma's by a long shot). And plenty of other schools on the list share states with other major programs.

It's not that I'm just questioning Michigan's spot. Nebraska is in there on rep alone. It's bull shit. They are great, passionate fans and have been for decades, and they travel in droves, but it's a tiny state (there are more people in Wayne County alone, for example) and not a program that, from what I've seen, draws a lot of fans who don't have ties to the state or university. I would be surprised if they cracked the Top 20, if someone were able to come up with a viable census for quantifying the population of fan bases. Same with Oklahoma. Off the top of my head, I'd wager schools like Florida, FSU and maybe even Miami (despite the state split) Georgia, Tennessee, Washington, Texas A&M and Wisconsin have larger fan bases than the Sooners. All speculation, granted, but as reasonable as Bruce Feldman's.

All research is approximation to the "truth" - any academic will tell you that. We make the most with the limited data we can get our hands on, but in doing so recognize that our data and findings are limited. ALthough you make good points, your outright dismissal of the data sources tossed about is unfortunate and unfounded. I can point out the same problems with your criticisms of the ideas used here -

UM having the most living alumni - the reasons you gave for dismissing this also apply to every other university on that list (they all have fans and non-fans), so your dismissal washes out.
The attractiveness of a logo - I know many who find the block M, along with the combination of 'yellow' and blue, attractive. So that criticism, although caries a little merit, also is not compelling. Plus, people often choose their teams for arbitrary reasons, which then leads them to be fans. The attractiveness of a logo does lead to increased fan base. That reversal of the causal arrow (from established fans being attracted to a team logo) is indisputable. Ask any big time athletic department.

If researchers had to find the perfect data, no research would be done. It is a continuum - having no data like Feldman is an abrogation of any responsibility, and is simply egoistic laziness. Nonetheless, your outright dismissal of the ideas tossed about here is at the other end of the continuum and is just as bad. A fundamental part of the research process is about community, about people sharing ideas. That aspect of the process is going on here.

Winning creates fans outside of your state/region. It's obvious why Michigan has fallen off. They haven't won a BCS game or beaten OSU in quite a while. That and they share a fan base with MSU, that draws a significant number of Michiganders. I think its very plausible they are no higher than 9.

ND is the only team really to defy the basic victories keeping a national fan base, but I'm sure most of us can figure out why.